feat: move Slot type into it's own library #3639
Conversation
|
@cozfuttu is attempting to deploy a commit to the unionbuild Team on Vercel. A member of the Team first needs to authorize it. |
| // mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => uint256)[]) => ["uint256", "mapping[]", "uint256"] | ||
| fn parse_layout(layout: &str) -> Result<Vec<String>, String> { | ||
| // 1. Basic validation | ||
| if !layout.starts_with("mapping(") || !layout.ends_with(')') { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
don't we also need to be able to calculate when the layout is not mapping but an array?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok, I'll add support for arrays as well.
| // mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => uint256)[])[]) => ["uint256", "mapping[]", "uint256", "mapping[]", "uint256"] | ||
| // mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => uint256)[]))[]) => ["uint256", "mapping[]", "uint256", "uint256", "mapping[]", "uint256"] | ||
| // mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => uint256)[]) => ["uint256", "mapping[]", "uint256"] | ||
| fn parse_layout(layout: &str) -> Result<Vec<String>, String> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@benluelo Do you know of a simple parsing lib for rust where we can define the grammar and do the parsing? It would be cleaner and safer to use a well tested parser.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I highly recommend peg for this usecase, it makes it very trivial to define recursive grammars: https://docs.rs/peg/latest/peg/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i'll give it a shot, thanks for the feedback guys
Closes #3417
Created a small binary for slot calculation as well. Usage:
cargo run --bin slot-calculator --layout "mapping(uint256 => mapping(uint256 => uint256)[])" --keys 100 1 123